Learn more Download now Shop now Shop now flip flip flip Shop now Learn More Shop now Shop now Shop now Learn more Shop Fire Shop Kindle Learn More Shop now Shop now Learn more



on 29 August 2016
Elia Kazan wanted to make socially-realistic drama on stage (on the New York stages in the company of Lee J.Cobb and Arthur Kennedy) and, later on film. He was keen on location filming too, probably being influenced by the neo-realists which brought to his later films like 'On the Waterfront' and 'Panic in the Streets' a great sense of involvement in the action.

The film concerns itself with how politics can get in the way of justice,especially when there seems to be an almost incestuous relationship between the authorities - the politicians - who are elected to run the city and the enforcement arms of the law - the police and the District Attorney. In a democracy,the two should be separate but here,, as in many noirish thrillers, they are enmeshed, with the politicians having undue influence. This forms the background of a police procedural/courtroom drama which begins with the shooting of a priest in the street one evening. Of course, the crime shocked the community and witnesses queue up to give their rendition of what they saw, or, as it turns out later, what they thought they saw. A veteran from the war is' identified' , extradited from Ohio and subjected to an ordeal of interrogation by the Chief of Police (Lee J.Cobb) and his sergeant (Karl Malden) ; it appears that the modern basics (a) of demanding a lawyer (b) pleading the fifth (c) being kept awake for the interrogation in methods akin to the Gestapo were not current at the time. So desperate are the police to get the killer to throw him to the baying hounds of the Press and the corrupt politicians they forget the human right to access justice.

District Attorney Harvey ( Dana Andrews) seems to have an open-and -shut case. He has a 'confession' which the veteran later denies after getting some sleep; he has the revolver which allegedly was the murder weapon and a psychiatrist's provision of a motive in which the veteran is bitter because his return from the war was marked by unemployment. A Coroner's court makes the decision to rule that the priest's death was murder in the first degree. The baying hounds in the coroner's courtroom get their first taste of 'justice' .

The next section really shows how the District Attorney could be railroaded by a corrupt politico who wants to be elected to prevent his utter ruin as he is the secret owner of a corporation which is going to build a charity facility. The D.A.'s wife, is also involved and the D.A. is threatened with dire consequences if he does not drop his obvious misgivings with the case. The Judge at the preliminary hearing cannot understand why a prosecuter does not appear to be prosecuting and also threatens him in chambers to proceed with a malfeasance suit which would disbar the D.A.The next day, The D.A. continues his 'prosecution' by the perfectly legal manoeuvre of questioning the witnesses again, in the cause of truth. In a very short time, he demolished all their statements mainly because his team had been out and about to test them. The most telling was the fact that the gun was fired from behind at a peculiar lofty angle; the D.A gets the judge to load the gun and hand it back to him. A colleague fires the shot from the same angle as the alleged shooter and nothing happened as further ballistics tests by outside experts found a faulty firing pin. The 'evidence' was inferior. Tjhe corrupt politician metes out his own form of justice on himself when an investigative reporter finds out about his little financial peccadillo. Eventually, due to honesty and gritty resolution, justice was done.

The film was gripping from beginning to end as Kazan raised the tone of the piece beginning with a folksy 'Our Town' type of delivery, raising the volume to crescendo in the courtroom scenes before the calmness of a clear conscience, uncorrupted by self-serving pillars of the community. brings everything back to where it was before. The elements of noir were certainly in evidence, especially in the staccato dialogue between the reporters and the police. The story was based on fact, apparently, and the killer in real life was never found. The film extolled the virtues of never quitting when one's gut tells you that a man may be innocent ; the pressures to convict to suit a lynch mob mentality and the ambitions of shady but outwardly 'upright' civic leaders were very well drawn and voiced by Dana Andrews. This was a positive film with an eternal message.
3 people found this helpful
|0Comment|Report abuse
TOP 1000 REVIEWERon 10 May 2016
EXCELLENT! I was quite impressed by this 1947 oldie but goldie "film noir" mixing a criminal investigation with politics. Below, more of my impressions, with some limited SPOILERS.

PRECISION: this is the review of "Fox Film Noir" Region 1 NTSC USA+Canada version. It will NOT play on Region 2 PAL Europe + UK equipement.

This film is based on a real story which happened 4 February 1924 in Bridgegport, Connecticut. That evening a respected priest, Father Dahme, was shot and killed on the street, without any apparent motive. The investigation which followed was a quite dramatic one, but I will not say here more to avoid SPOILERS and I advise you to not research the whole thing before watching the film. In "Boomerang" the events were a little bit amended, but in general lines the film follows the real story.

The film is relatively short (88 minutes) but very well organised and filled with events. It was only the second film Elia Kazan directed, but it is clear that even at that stage he had a great mastery of his trade. All actors did very well but two rise above the crowd - Dana Andrews, who plays Connecticut Attorney General supervising the investigation and Arthur Kennedy, who plays... well, somebody else.

There is a terrible political dilemma in this film. We are told in the beginning that a new administration was recently elected in the state, replacing a corrupt previous government. The terrible murder and the difficult investigation are now being used by the people who lost elections to prepare their comeback to the top of the government - and they are doing a helluva job about it. Which forces the new administration to ask itself a question: "How many angles can we cut in the name of greater good?"... It will be a difficult debate... I will say no more.

I will keep this review short, to avoid spoilers. I never heard about this film before but I am so glad that I discovered it. Notwithstanding some minor weaknesses of the scenario, it nevertheless IMPRESSED me! A recommended viewing. ENJOY!
One person found this helpful
|0Comment|Report abuse
This film is based on a true story - a crime story set in the 1940's - another hit for Elia Kazan - a good role for Dana Andrews
|0Comment|Report abuse
on 23 March 2018
Very speedy delivery, item in good quality, v. please, thank you!
|0Comment|Report abuse
on 8 October 2016
I'm afraid Eureka are just not up to par with their Blu-ray offerings. I expected a lot better. This is the fourth offering of theirs I have had that is not up par. Boomerang blu-ray is no better than the dvd. Flight of the Phoenix was no better either. It's a pity that Arrow cannot issue all of these films as their Blu-ray offerings are amazing.
One person found this helpful
|0Comment|Report abuse
on 1 January 2018
No idea what the title of this film means. The film is based on a true story about the killing of a priest. The police needed to get a conviction for political motivations and a culprit was identified – an ex-army wanderer Arthur Kennedy (Waldron). However, did he actually commit the crime? Dana Andrews (Harvey) is the prosecutor tasked with convicting him.

There are a lot of characters singing from the same page in going for a conviction and handing out the death penalty to Kennedy. The film actually starts quite slowly and we keep getting a narrator unnecessarily blabbing on and on. Things pick up with the appearance of Kennedy and it helps that the film is relating a true incident. It all ends in the courtroom scene which will keep you watching as Andrews maintains the tension with his unorthodox approach. The film satisfies in that it also provides an update at the very end as to how things pan out for a couple of characters.

It’s an ok film with a good cast – detective Karl Malden (White) isn’t even credited. He’s there along with police chief Lee J. Cobb (Robinson) and director Elia Kazan, all of whom would reunite for the classic “On the Waterfront” (1954) with Marlon Brando.
|0Comment|Report abuse
on 14 July 2015
Excellent
|0Comment|Report abuse
on 27 April 2016
Perfect dvd thanks x
|0Comment|Report abuse
on 28 January 2016
Fast shipping. Recommended
|0Comment|Report abuse
TOP 1000 REVIEWERon 25 November 2010
*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Boomerang is directed by Elia Kazan, based on a story written by Fulton Oursler (Anthony Abbot), with the screenplay written by Richard Murphy. It stars Dana Andrews, Jane Wyatt, Lee J. Cobb, Arthur Kennedy, Ed Begley & Karl Malden. Plot is based around a true story, a case that even today remains unsolved, where a priest was shot and murdered in Bridgeport, Connecticut in 1924. A vagrant and ex-serviceman (here played by Kennedy) was indicted for the murder. The evidence at first glance seemed solid, but the state attorney (Andrews here) on prosecution duties wasn't convinced and set about deconstructing the evidence. Much to the shock of his superiors and others with vested interests.

Gripping melodrama told in semi-documentary style and filmed on location in Stamford, Connecticut (Kazan was refused permission to actually film in Bridgeport). As a crime story it's as solid as it gets, dripping with realism and filling out the plot with may notable points of reference. Political pressures, police procedural, corruption, unstable witnesses, bitter dames and of course an innocent man on trial for his life (we know the latter since it's based on facts and Kazan lets us in on it early on). It's all in there for a taut, suspenseful and noirishly well told story. The acting is top dollar, both from the leads and an impressive supporting cast. While even tho more time should have been afforded the "dodgy dealings" aspects, it slots into place nicely enough to still leave us splendidly agitated at the no resolution outcome. It's all in the build up and execution. 7/10
19 people found this helpful
|0Comment|Report abuse